Talk:Catawissa Creek/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Folklore1 (talk · contribs) 18:17, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

As I perform the review, I will update the following table. Please look below the table for my questions and comments. Folklore1 (talk) 18:17, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
	1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	See notes below for corrections applied.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
	2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Properly supported by references
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	See notes below for corrections applied.
	2c. it contains no original research.	no original research
	3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	sufficient coverage
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	reasonable level of detail
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	consistently neutral tone
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	no recent edit wars
	6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	1 public domain and 3 Creative Commons 3.0 images
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	relevant images with suitable captions
	7. Overall assessment.

Hydrology

The first five paragraphs of this section present hydrology statistics in the form of dry, repetitively structured text. It's boring and hard to read. I think a table would be a more readable alternative. Folklore1 (talk) 19:26, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Slightly better, but still very repetitive. Too many paragraphs begin with "At the", "At a", or "At". I still think a table would be more appropriate than text for this section, because all these paragraphs do is present statistical data for a list of locations. Folklore1 (talk) 13:55, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Even better now. I'll try to get it further improved, if you want. --Jakob (talk) 15:21, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I still recommend a table, but I think the text has improved just enough to qualify for GA. So, I'm going to call it  Done. Consider using a table if you'd like to improve the article further after the GA review. Folklore1 (talk) 16:44, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Geology

The second paragraph of this section begins with numeric characters. I suggest reoganizing the sentence so that it doesn't start with numerics. Folklore1 (talk) 19:26, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done Folklore1 (talk) 13:23, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Course

"Catawissa Creek rises in strip mines" is a bit unclear. What is happening? Is it flowing up to the surface from somewhere below? Folklore1 (talk) 19:26, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

"past the geographical features Round Head and Blue Head" seems to have a word missing. Folklore1 (talk) 19:26, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

The third paragraph of this section contains a sentence beginning: "The takes a sharp turn" Folklore1 (talk) 19:26, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

All fixed. --Jakob (talk) 21:08, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done Folklore1 (talk) 13:24, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Early history

"Historically" is kind of vague. When, approximately? Folklore1 (talk) 19:26, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Presumably before European colonization of the area in the late 1760s to early 1780s. --Jakob (talk) 21:08, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

I've replaced this sentence with a short paragraph mentioning the original Native American inhabitants, and the meaning of Catawissa as explained in the referenced source. That's interfering a little more than I usually do with a review, so please take a close look and let me know if it looks okay. Folklore1 (talk) 14:36, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I like it. I didn't know that fact, although this seems to contradict what you wrote about the etymology of "Catawissa". --Jakob (talk) 15:21, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

"Growing fat" seems more a more likely interpretation, because the reference source identifies a specific language.  Done Folklore1 (talk) 16:57, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Modern history

I suggest replacing "and connecting Catawissa and Pottsville" with ", connecting Catawissa with Pottsville" to cut back on unnecessary "and" occurences. Folklore1 (talk) 19:49, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 13:36, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

"Historically, there was a paper mill existed" is vague and ungrammatical. Folklore1 (talk) 19:49, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

The grammar error has been corrected, but the mill's time period is still vague. I think even an approximate time period would be better than "Historically". Folklore1 (talk) 13:45, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

"Historically, the Catawissa Water" is just vague.Folklore1 (talk) 19:49, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Maybe something just a little more specific than "Historically"? Folklore1 (talk) 13:45, 27 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 16:58, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

"in the late 20th and 21st centuries" is a bit confusing. Should that be changed to "late 20th century and early 21st century"? Folklore1 (talk) 19:49, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 13:40, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

All fixed. --Jakob (talk) 21:08, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 16:58, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Watershed

I suggest replacing "The communities Sheppton and Oneida are also" with "Sheppton and Oneida are also" so we don't have two consecutive sentences beginning with "The communities". The paragraph will be easier to read. Folklore1 (talk) 19:59, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 13:32, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

The first paragraph of this section might flow more smoothly if the first two sentences are combined. I suggest replacing the period with a colon at the end of "ranges through four counties" and removing "They are" from the second sentence. Folklore1 (talk) 20:12, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 13:27, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps the fourth paragraph could also be improved by combining two sentences. Remove "They are called" and attach the tunnel names to the previous sentence with a colon or maybe "known as". Folklore1 (talk) 20:12, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 13:27, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Five consecutive sentences in the fourth paragraph begin with "The". That's awfully repetitive. I suggest modifying the sentence structure of two or three and/or starting a sentence with the tunnel name (without preceding by "The"). Folklore1 (talk) 20:18, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 13:27, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

The last paragraph of this section has two consective sentences beginning with numeric characters. Ouch! Folklore1 (talk) 20:21, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 13:27, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

All fixed. --Jakob (talk) 21:08, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Flora and fauna

In the second paragraph of this section, "Historically" seems vague. Folklore1 (talk) 20:37, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. --Jakob (talk) 21:08, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done Folklore1 (talk) 13:31, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Recreation

Should "lowdam" be "low dam"? Folklore1 (talk) 20:37, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

No, that's how it's spelled in the source. --Jakob (talk) 21:08, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done Folklore1 (talk) 13:29, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

References

With citations to book sources, please include the specific page where the information can be found. This can save a lot of time for reviewers and other people who might want to look up this information. I added the page number to a book reference cited in the second paragraph of the lead section. Fortunately, the link to Google still pointed to the proper page. Folklore1 (talk) 21:01, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  Done

The citation for "Remediating the Audenreid Mine Tunnel Discharge" does not mention the name of the work, publisher, or author. This can be a problem at a later date if the web address for this publication changes. Work, publisher, and author can help us to find the archive where the article was moved if the current link goes dead. Folklore1 (talk) 21:09, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 16:21, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Please added the appropriate page number to the citation for John H. Brubaker's book. Folklore1 (talk) 21:12, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 16:21, 27 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 16:29, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Please cite the publisher's name for *Report of Progress*. Folklore1 (talk) 21:16, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 16:29, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

The citation to *Soil Survey* needs a few more details. Folklore1 (talk) 21:19, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 16:21, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

The citation to "Schuylkill Groups Seek Waterway Grants" should give the publication's name. Folklore1 (talk) 14:41, 27 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 16:21, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Please cite the publication name for "County gives out watershed grants". Folklore1 (talk) 14:43, 27 December 2013 (UTC)  Done Folklore1 (talk) 16:21, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

@Folklore1: Mostly fixed. Page numbers added for all but one of the Google Books cited. The remediating the audenried tunnel source already had a title, but no listed author. I added the publisher instead. --Jakob (talk) 15:21, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

@Folklore1: Report of progress citation fixed. --Jakob (talk) 16:26, 27 December 2013 (UTC)